Aircraft operators face a challenging set of circumstances when planning flights across the Middle East, as military tensions continue to escalate between Israel and Iran-backed forces in Lebanon, Gaza, and Yemen. These conflicts are extending risks into nearby countries, complicating flight safety across a region that already presents a variety of operational hazards. Osprey Flight Solutions, a leading security consultancy, has issued a stark warning to operators, advising extreme caution as the conflict spreads to include parts of Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.
In a recent presentation, Matthew Borie, Osprey’s chief intelligence officer, emphasised the importance of robust risk management in light of conflicting advisories from different regulators. For operators flying in and around the conflict zones, keeping up with fast-evolving risks is critical, especially with the inconsistent guidance on safe flight levels and the unpredictability of missile and air defense systems across the region.
Inconsistent Guidance and Risk Zones
On September 28, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) issued conflict zone information bulletins urging operators to avoid the Tel Aviv and Beirut flight information zones (FIRs) at all altitudes. This warning comes despite both airports remaining open for operations, leaving operators in a difficult position regarding the safety of flying into these areas.
The situation is made more complicated by the fact that Iran has launched several ballistic missile attacks on Israel, many of which have overwhelmed Israel’s air defense systems. These missiles have passed through the airspace of Iraq, Jordan, and Syria, but authorities in these countries, along with others in the region, have not issued NOTAMs (Notices to Airmen) outlining the associated risks. This lack of coordination further complicates risk assessment for operators planning flights through these regions.
Ballistic Missile Threats and All-Altitude Weapons Systems
Osprey’s security briefing highlighted the heightened dangers since the onset of missile attacks. According to Borie, operators need to be vigilant about their ability to safely land and take off from Beirut. He noted that Israeli missile strikes have targeted areas as close as three kilometres from Rafic Hariri International Airport, emphasising that operators must continuously assess new information sources, such as advisories from ICAO and national regulators, to ensure their flight plans remain safe.
A significant concern raised by Osprey is the risk posed by all-altitude air defense systems and missile strikes across the Middle East, particularly in areas such as the Red Sea. Forces operating in this region have access to long-range weaponry, further complicating flight planning. For operators flying over conflict zones, ensuring that flight levels are above potential risk areas is essential. However, the inconsistency in published altitude ceilings from various regulators, ranging between flight levels 250 and 320, can give operators a false sense of security.
Borie pointed out that while some international regulators have issued guidance regarding safe altitudes, the lack of clarity and uniformity can lead to misinformed decisions, especially when considering missile threats originating from Iraq. Osprey’s advice to operators is to avoid nighttime flights over this airspace, where risk assessment and situational awareness may be more challenging, and reaction time to emerging threats is reduced.
Impact of GPS/GNSS Interference and Jamming Tactics
Another growing concern for aircraft operating in the region is the increased risk of GPS/GNSS interference. Jamming and spoofing tactics have been deployed by various military forces, making it more difficult for aircraft to rely on satellite navigation systems. Such interference could result in disruptions to key navigational and communication systems, complicating flight operations in an already volatile region. Borie highlighted this as an area where operators need to exercise additional caution and ensure they have reliable backup systems and protocols in place to counteract potential interference.
Escalating Conflict and Wider Regional Implications
In terms of the broader conflict, Osprey’s security team has assessed the risk of further escalation. The potential for direct Israeli attacks on Iranian targets, particularly oil production facilities, is a significant concern, with such actions likely to widen the scope of the conflict and increase the risks faced by operators flying across the region. Borie noted that direct involvement from U.S. and allied forces could further extend the conflict into the Gulf states, with military actions in these areas presenting additional hazards for air traffic.
As a result, operators need to take a cautious approach, combining automated tools with manual risk assessment methods to ensure flight plans remain safe. Osprey’s proprietary platforms, such as Osprey Sentinel and Atlas, provide real-time intelligence to help operators reconcile safety concerns with the latest regulatory notices and geopolitical developments. These tools enable operators to assess the situation on an ongoing basis, allowing for a more dynamic approach to flight safety.
Best Practices for Operators in Conflict Zones
Given the evolving nature of the conflict and the multitude of risks, Osprey has outlined several best practices for operators planning flights through the Middle East:
1. Engage with Multiple Sources of Information: Operators should actively consult ICAO, EASA, and their national regulators to remain up to date on the latest advisories and NOTAMs. In regions where information from regulators is inconsistent or conflicting, operators must take a more conservative approach to route planning.
2. Assess Risks Holistically: Beyond regulatory guidance, operators should factor in real-time intelligence about missile threats, air defense activities, and potential GPS jamming. Platforms like Osprey Sentinel provide valuable insights to help operators make informed decisions based on up-to-date risk profiles.
3. Avoid Nighttime Flights in High-Risk Areas: With missile threats emerging from Iraq and other areas, Osprey advises against nighttime operations through high-risk airspaces where visibility is limited, and the potential for a rapid escalation of conflict is higher.
4. Consider All-Altitude Threats: Operators should be aware of the varying risks posed by all-altitude weapons systems and avoid relying solely on altitude guidance from regulators, which may not fully account for the capabilities of weapons systems in use across the region.
5. Prepare for GPS Interference: Given the increase in GPS jamming and spoofing activities, operators should ensure their aircraft are equipped with alternative navigational tools and that crews are trained to handle potential GPS outages during flights in and around conflict zones.
Conclusion
As military conflicts continue to intensify across the Middle East, aircraft operators face unprecedented challenges in ensuring safe operations. The evolving risks from missile strikes, air defense systems, and GPS interference require a proactive approach to flight planning, with operators needing to consult multiple sources of information and adopt both automated and manual risk assessment methods. Osprey Flight Solutions’ comprehensive intelligence platforms provide essential insights, helping operators navigate the complexities of flying in conflict zones. By following best practices and remaining vigilant, operators can minimise risks and ensure safer flights in this volatile region.
